Two last things that are largely being overlooked that shouldn’t be:
1. The fact that all the responses to the IN RFRA law from the right were entirely couched in language that explained how it was all about religious liberty and that no one would ever support discriminating against LGBTs should be a pretty strong indication of just how much ground the social conservatives have lost on gay rights in the past several years.
2. Allow me to once again double down on something I often say here, which is that for the vast majority of the people the vast majority of the time, political ideology has less to do with core beliefs than it does getting your way at the moment. Like the Donald Sterling case last spring, the pizzeria hubbub was a textbook case of what conservatives have long argued they wanted for America: a free market where citizens and consumers decided the fate of small businesses, not government regulators. Listening to the reaction from talk radio last week and yesterday, as well as seeing clips of the punditry, it appears that too was more of a strategy that a value.
If boycotts (and negative yelping and such) were all that were occurring, #2 would be a good point.Report
If conservatives are horrified by threats, why wasn’t there an outpouring of sympathy for Adria Richards?Report
Oh, I’m not arguing that conservatives aren’t hypocritical or at least inconsistent in their outrage. I’m just saying that, contrary to what I have seen asserted repeatedly, what happened there wasn’t really a market decision.Report
The thing about hypocrisy arguments is that they fire both ways.
So, if progressives are horrified by threats, why wasn’t there an outpouring of sympathy for Memories Pizza?
Perhaps because Tod is right and what both sides value more than peace is victory.Report
Hypocrisy is a human characteristic. Find humans and there you go. Attach humans to something like social media that seems to magnify many of our more questionable traits and boom.
What was done to the Mem Piz folks was wrong. What was done to the “anti-gay cake” bakers in Fla was wrong. Every bodies side does stupid stuff.Report
@j-r So, if progressives are horrified by threats, why wasn’t there an outpouring of sympathy for Memories Pizza?
There was an lot of progressive don’t do that going on.Report
The thing about hypocrisy arguments is that they fire both ways.
So, if progressives are horrified by threats, why wasn’t there an outpouring of sympathy for Memories Pizza?
Uhhh, because Memories Pizza is actively advocating discriminating against gays and that seemed like the bigger worry? I mean, I’m sure lots of lefties – maybe most, I dunno actually – were opposed to the threats. Were they supposed to be anti-threats before they were pro-non-discrimination? No one’s ever told me the rules on this stuff so I don’t really know.Report
Because Adria Richards had it coming?Report
You seriously think death threats were warranted?Report
Is no one going to complain about the “both sides do it” defense here?Report
You can, Jaybird. I mean, you can’t be on a “side” and complain about that, right?
ALsotoo, j r is flat out wrong when he says that hypocrisy charges cut both ways. Eg, if I’m a huge advocate of military power based solutions to political problems and I accuse a pacifist of hypocritically apologizing for the use of force by a group she favors, it makes no sense to say that I’m also hypocritical when I apologize for the use of force by one of my favored groups.
Personally, I find that charges of hypocrisy fall on the tiniest of all possible ears. They’re just itty bitty ones.
(Taking the time to demonstrate that person is being inconsistent, on the other hand…)Report
No, I’m fine with only one side complaining when someone points out that both sides do it.Report
I’m fine without anyone bringing it up either. Doesn’t seem relevant to the topic. Just someone pushing their ideology on us, yeah? A “Hey! You guys! Yer doin it rong, ya ********* *** ******* ******************s!” sorta thing.Report
@stillwater
Exactly how am I wrong? I just gave the perfect example of a hypocrisy claim that works forward and backwards. The answer to both questions is the same: both sides care more about winning. Your own answer demonstrated this.Report
j r,
Glad to help!Report
I think the Pizza thing sucks. I hope the $800,000 makes up for it in some small way.Report
Hypocrisy = partisanship
Sometimes, partisanship needs a bit of make-up to enable some to maintain their self-respect when the cold light of morning hits after a night of carousing, but beneath all that plaster, it’s still good, old-fashioned partisanship.
both sides do it = acknowledgement of a two-party system
See above for details.Report
I don’t see the connection for #2. None of the conservatives I’ve seen have argued that the government should come in and protect the pizza shoppe. There’s no contradiction in saying “sellers and buyers should have the right to refuse service” and also saying “this specific act of refusal is wrong”. And that’s not even getting into the death-threats and such.Report
None of the conservatives I’ve seen have argued that the government should come in and protect the pizza shoppe.
Ironically, this all happened because people wanted protection from the government if/when they opted to discriminate, no? They were already asking the government for help, and that’s what triggered the whole pizza-shop fiasco.Report
zic,
That’s my take on it as well. The point of Indian-like laws is for an actual rejection of service to be challenged in court, with the hoped-for ruling being which falls in favor of religious expression.
Maybe the way trizzlor has phrased it is sorta correct tho: conservatives don’t want protection of the pizza joint, they want protection from discrimination restrictions. They want to be allowed to…Report
Grossly oversimplifying, here are two conservative values:
a. Businesses should be able to do what they want;
b. Liberals / liberal values should lose.
Occasionally, these values come into conflict (eg., the Eich firing). Dreher’s blog (and commenters) is a great example of the struggles that some conservatives have in reconciling such conflicts.
Rarely, but with increasing frequency, conservatives lose on both points — a liberal win leads to businesses not being able to discriminate. On Dreher’s blog, this is largely seen as a great tide of persecution descending on religious conservatives. Pointing out that a substantial majority of Americans see themselves as Christians and that religious conservatives have lead the fight in preventing reasonable accommodations getting written into law is largely a fruitless task.Report
a liberal win leads to businesses not being able to discriminate.
I take it this somehow benefits the financial sector.
Odd how failing S&L’s used to be a Rep. constituency, the financial sector generally is now a Dem. constituency, while payday lenders are the dog everyone loves to kick, and nations squabble over lost pirates’ treasure found.Report
ICYMI off the twitter feed, Damon Linker offered a concise and thoughtful versions of the third position on RFRAs and SSM: http://theweek.com/articles/548197/indiana-gay-marriage-liberal-betrayal-american-liberalismReport